The Genetic Function and Nature of Literature

By Randall Hood
Smashwords Edition 1979 by Randall Hood.
Smashwords Edition License Notes
This ebook is licensed for your personal enoyment only. This ebook may not be re!
sold or "i#en away to other people. $f you would like to share this book with another
person% please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. $f you&re readin" this book
and did not purchase it% or it was not purchased for your use only% then please return to
Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respectin" the hard work
of this author.
'll ri"hts reser#ed
Table of Contents
The (enetic )unction and *ature of +iterature
Endnotes
,iblio"raphy
The Genetic Function and Nature of Literature
-any thanks for the paper% which $ ha#e read with interest. $.m ama/ed that you could
ha#e formulated these ideas as early as 1979. The paper is of course short% and the ideas
are bare!boned% but they.re #alid% it seems to me% for all that. Since it is such pioneerin"
work% $.d think% if $ were you% about addin" it to the list of titles on the 01arwinian
+iterary Studies0 pa"e on 2ikipedia.
,ob Storey 3'u"ust 45156 +iterary 1arwinist and author of 7i8Mimesis and the
Human Animal: On the Biogenetic Foundations of Literary Representation7i8.
The fact literature is shared amon" so many cultures of the world implies literature
fulfills a #ital function amon" those cultures. Some people say it is irrele#ant to look for a
function or purpose% but $ disa"ree. $f the function is found% it could lead to a better
understandin" of literature and literary criticism. The primary purpose of this paper is to
show the ultimate function of literature is to aid the sur#i#al of specific "ene pools within
the human species. This o#erall function can be broken down into three minor functions
of educatin"% moti#atin" and entertainin".
)irst of all% literature needs to be defined. 2ebster&s *ew 2orld 1ictionary of the
'merican +an"ua"e defines literature as% 9'll writin"s in prose or #erse of an
ima"inati#e nature.: 2orks of nonfiction are not included in this definition% but the
function of nonfiction may well be similar to the function of ima"inati#e writin". $t is
also hard to tell what is nonfiction and what is fiction. -any people feel sacred writin"s%
such as the ,ible% are alle"orical fiction% whereas others belie#e these writin"s are
literally true. -ost people belie#e the 9pro#en: writin"s of science to be nonfiction% but
there is the possibility they are totally or partially fiction. )or this paper% literature will be
"enerally defined as all the ima"inati#e material in writin"s and in oral traditions. $ feel
confident in this broader definition because studies ha#e been done that show stories%
no#els% tele#ision% oral folklore% ma"a/ines and mo#ies all perform the same functions.
1
'fter briefly e;plainin" some of the current theories on literature&s function and
e;plainin" the "enetic function% a few e;amples of literature will be used to illustrate how
they contribute to "ene pool sur#i#al.
'ristotle thou"ht a function of poetry was to communicate a 9uni#ersal e#ent.: This
e#ent is not supposed to tell what happened or what took place% but what happens and
what takes place.
4
$mitation 3mimesis6 and catharsis are used by the poet to brin" about
this 9uni#ersal e#ent.: The function of imitation is to teach and to help man see reality.
Throu"h catharsis% man is able to cleanse his mind of e;cessi#e emotions and also "ain a
"reater knowled"e of the nature of "ods and men.
<
$n ancient cultures% myths make up a lar"e part of literature. The anthropolo"ist
,ronislaw -alinowski thou"ht these myths played an important role. He wrote=
-yth fulfills in primiti#e culture an indispensable function> it e;presses% enhances%
and codifies beliefs> it safe"uards and enforces morality> it #ouches for the efficiency of
ritual and contains practical rules for the "uidance of men. -yth is thus a #ital in"redient
of human ci#ili/ation> it is not an idle tale% but a hard!worked acti#e force> it is not an
intellectual e;planation% but a pra"matic charter of primiti#e faith and moral wisdom.
?
'nthropolo"ist @laude +e#i!Strauss said myths ha#e an 9underlyin" structure of
relationships: which are problem sol#in".
A
Two other anthropolo"ists% 1ardel and
,er"son% thou"ht myths are a basis for reli"ion and morality. ,er"son also said myth
functions in 9counteractin" the e;cesses of intelli"ence and in promotin" a positi#e faith
in the continuity of life.:
B
Cenneth ,urke% ,er"son% and 'ristotle seem to ha#e been in a"reement that one
function of literature is to curb e;cesses. ,urke de#eloped the li"htnin" rod theory. He
thou"ht catharsis in literature functions like a li"htnin" rod to "et rid of destructi#e forces
in the indi#idual. He also thou"ht literature is similar to a #accine. ,y bein" e;posed to
destructi#e forces in small amounts% the indi#idual is prepared when a lar"er dose hits.
The ele"y% for e;ample% 9functions to de#elop tolerance to possibilities of "reat
misfortune by accustomin" himDto misfortune in small doses% administered
stylistically.:
7
,urke felt 9scientism: produces an a""ressi#e nature in man that needs to
be curbed by the #ision% intuition% ima"ination and re#elation found in literature.
E
*orthrop )rye did not think mytholo"y is a form of literature% but he did think it
performs the same ob.
9
$ts function is to make the obecti#e world human and to "i#e 9us
an e;perience that stretches us #ertically to the hei"hts and depths of what the human
mind can concei#e.:
15
+iterature helps man produce a #ision of the society he wants to
li#e in. 'ccordin" to )rye% mytholo"y also helps con#ince people to accept the rules%
laws and customs of their society. $an ,arbour elaborated further on this social function
of myths=
-yths promote the inte"ration of society. They are a cohesi#e force bindin" a
community to"ether and contributin" to social solidarity% "roup identity and communal
harmony. -yth sanctions the e;istin" social order and ustifies its status system and
power structure% pro#idin" a rationale for social and political institutions.
11
-ar;ist critics would a"ree that the function of literature is to pro#ide a rationale for
social and political institutions% but they limited the institutions e;clusi#ely to the
socialist #ariety.
14
Sol/henitsyn% @hekhob and Hemin"way felt the function of literature is
to find the truth. Saul ,ellow and Foseph @onrad thou"ht fiction should find 9what is
fundamental% endurin" and essential.:
1<
Tennyson thou"ht poetry ser#ed as a prophesy.
There are two reasons for briefly co#erin" these theories. )irst% they seem to be
"enerally representati#e of many theories on the function of literature. Second% $ want to
show that they are compatible with and support the o#erall "enetic function of literature.
These pre#ious theories e;plain minor functions of literature% and they are part of the
maor "enetic function. ,efore it is shown how literature aids in the sur#i#al of specific
"ene pools% a few basic principles of sociobiolo"y must be e;plained.
're (od and *ature then at strife%
That *ature lends such e#il dreams%
So careful of the type she seems%
So careless of the sin"le life.
This stan/a from Tennyson&s $n -emoriam may be about the death of 'rthur Hallam%
but it is also a "ood e;ample of how sociobiolo"y operates. The specific "ene pool of any
"i#en "roup represents 9the type.: Sociobiolo"y maintains that 9the sin"le life: is ust a
9throwaway sur#i#al machine: for 9the type.:
1?
$n other words% humans or any other
forms of life are ust #ehicles for "ene pool sur#i#al. Sociobiolo"ical e#olution is a
modern modification of 1arwinian e#olution. The former holds that the "ene pool
represents the ultimate unit of sur#i#al% and not the 1arwinian concept of the indi#idual
as the ultimate unit of sur#i#al.
The "ene pool represents the collection of "enes in an interbreedin" "roup of
indi#iduals% such as in a specific society or cultural "roup. $t must be remembered the
"ene pool is not consciously fi"htin" for sur#i#al% but that "ene pool sur#i#al is a passi#e
selection process. $f one "roup of humans had "enetically acGuired the ability to create
literature and another "roup had not% and if that ability had a sur#i#al ad#anta"e to it% then
the "ene pool that carried that ability would be more likely to sur#i#e. The e#idence for
the "ene pool as the sur#i#al unit and not the indi#idual as this unit can be found in the
social% altruistic and se;ual beha#iors of any "roup of or"anisms. +ater on% it will be
shown how literature supports the "ene pool theory. *ow it will be shown why literature
has a "enetic base.
$f literature has a "enetic function% then literature should also ha#e a "enetic base.
Sociobiolo"ists ha#e two Guestions they ask themsel#es to see if trait of man has a
"enetic base. )irst% they want to know if the trait in Guestion is found in many ancient and
modern cultures. $f it is% then they try to find out if it would ha#e any sur#i#al ad#anta"es
for that culture. $f the trait has a sur#i#al ad#anta"e too% then the e#idence is stron" the
trait has a "enetic base.
1A
Huestion one is easier to answer than Guestion two. 'lmost e#ery ancient and modern
culture has had some form of literature. -ost cultures ha#e different literatures% but it is
remarkable how similar the basic motifs are in literatures throu"hout the world. )lood
and creation myths can be found in practically e#ery society. Iiolence% se;% lo#e%
morality% hypocrisy and reli"ion are ust a few subects common to literatures around the
world. $n addition% different literatures not only use many of the same literary de#ices and
techniGues% but they also seem to pro"ress throu"h the same sta"es. )irst% there are oral
mytholo"ies that concern man&s relation to the "ods and uni#erse% and then% much later%
written fiction de#elops which is usually more concerned with man&s relation to other
men. $t seems unlikely that cultures so di#erse would ha#e deep structures of their
literature so similar if chance was the only factor in#ol#ed. $f these deep structures of
literature were "enetically based% then the similarities would be e;pected. That is enou"h
speculation for ri"ht now. The first Guestion has been answered J literature is found in
many ancient and modern cultures. )or the second Guestion% it now must be shown that
literature has a sur#i#al ad#anta"e.
+iterature is a maor part of any "i#en culture and the purpose of culture is to aid in
sur#i#al.
1B
+eslie '. 2hite said% 9@ulture is a maor biolo"ical adaptation of Homo
sapiens> and certainly we possess a biolo"ically e#ol#ed capacity for culture.:
17
The
reason man is dependent on culture for sur#i#al is because he is anatomically
unspeciali/ed and thus needs culture to adapt to #arious en#ironments.
1E
-ost animals are
adapted to fill specific niches% and so they rely mainly on instinct to sur#i#e in almost
e;actly the same way "enerations of their species had done before them. $n man% the
de#elopment of reason and culture allowed him to e;ploit different conditions as the
en#ironment chan"ed or as a tribe mo#ed. So% "roups that inherited the ability to acGuire
culture sur#i#ed o#er "roups that relied more on instinct to adapt to the en#ironment. *ot
only does culture help man adapt to his en#ironment% but it also pro#ides for a system of
social or"ani/ation which allows man to form lar"er societies. 2hite said=
$n short% social or"ani/ation is as necessary for the effecti#e conduct of life and for
sur#i#al of the human species as a technolo"ical adustment to and control o#er the
natural habitat. 'nd embracin" e#erythin" is a philosophy% a system of beliefs% wei"hted
with emotion or attitude or K#alues& which ser#es to relate man to both the earth and
cosmos% and to or"ani/e and orient his life collecti#ely and indi#idually.
19
's co#ered earlier% )rye% -alinowski and ,arbour felt literature plays a lar"e role in
e;pressin" this system of beliefs. +ar"er social "roups ha#e a sur#i#al ad#anta"e o#er
smaller ones
45
% and as the "roup becomes lar"er and more comple; the need for the
system of beliefs that is e;pressed in literature becomes e#en "reater.
41
@ulture does pro#ide a sur#i#al ad#anta"e for humans and literature is a lar"e part of
culture% and so the second part of the Guestion has been answered J literature does ha#e a
sur#i#al ad#anta"e. To summari/e the ar"ument a"ain% literature is found in many ancient
and modern cultures% and it does ha#e sur#i#al ad#anta"es% and so% accordin" to
sociobiolo"ical theory% the e#idence is stron" that literature has a "enetic base and ser#es
the function of aidin" in the sur#i#al of specific "ene pools within the human species.
The ar"ument mi"ht be used that literature is learned and not "enetic. The answer to
that% accordin" to sociobiolo"ical theory% is that there are "enes to de#elop and respond to
literature. $n the same manner *oam @homsky maintains we ha#e the ability to acGuire
certain deep structures of lan"ua"e% but not the "enetic ability to be born knowin" a
specific lan"ua"e. This "enetic ability to be able to de#elop and respond to literature and
not to ha#e a specific literature inherited is the result of man&s need to be fle;ible and
unspeciali/ed since he has to adapt his cultures to #aried and di#erse en#ironments. ' set
literature would be the same thin" as instinct% and that would limit the fle;ibility that is
uniGue to man in sur#i#al. )or e;ample% literature e;pressin" the "lories of war mi"ht
ha#e had a sur#i#al ad#anta"e for the Iikin"s in the 15th century% but in today&s nuclear
society% literature ad#ocatin" peace probably has a lar"er sur#i#al ad#anta"e for all "ene
pools.
*ow $ will present a few e;amples from literature to e;plain and illustrate how the
three minor functions contribute to the maor "enetic function. 's said earlier% these
minor functions are to educate% moti#ate% and entertain.
Since literature functions to aid in the sur#i#al of "ene pools% it seems literary topics
should deal with subects that contribute to "ene pool sur#i#al. +o#e% se;% #iolence%
altruism% philosophy% reli"ion% politics% morality% and psycholo"y are all related to "ene
pool sur#i#al and they are all dealt with e;tensi#ely in literature.
Some critics of sociobiolo"y say that if beha#ior is "enetically based% then why would
there be the need for culture to teach what is already "enetic. The sociobiolo"ical answer
to that is that since man&s sur#i#al is so dependent upon his fle;ibility% he e#ol#ed what
are called facultati#e "enes. These types of "enes make man more likely to act in a
certain manner% but they can be influenced by the en#ironment to chan"e their effects.
44

Hypertrophy is the 9"rowth of habits and customs throu"h interplay of "enetics and
culture.:
4<
+iterature has a hypertrophic function of influencin" facultati#e "enes. )or
e;ample% sociobiolo"ists claim that male dominance o#er females mi"ht be controlled by
a facultati#e "ene. $n the past% it has usually been more ad#anta"eous for mankind to ha#e
a male dominant society% and the literature of the time supported and reinforced that
#iew. Today% women are bein" freed from their traditional roles% and it may pro#e more
ad#anta"eous to "ene pool sur#i#al to ha#e a more e"alitarian society. There has been a
rise in feminist literature to "o alon" with women&s new freedoms% and this literature
ser#es the hypertrophic function of minimi/in" the influence the facultati#e "enes ha#e
on makin" us feel men should dominate o#er women.
2hen $ say a minor function of literature is to educate% it does not mean throu"h a
didactic method e;clusi#ely. -any thin"s are learned tacitly from literature. *umerous
aspects of our culture are reinforced throu"h stories that are usually thou"ht of as purely
entertainin". This idea has been de#eloped by -arshal -c+uhan in The -edium is the
-essa"e.
+iterature teaches about reli"ion% and reli"ion de#eloped to enhance sur#i#al.
4?
This
function of literature is in a"reement with many of the theorists mentioned earlier who
said that literature ser#ed as a basis for reli"ion. Reli"ion helps "ene pools sur#i#e
because it "i#es rules to li#e by% reassurance in difficult times% and it #alidates social
institution. 2ithout these% man would not ha#e a basis on which to act.
The ,ible pro#ides a basis for @hristians to li#e by% but it can be interpreted in many
ways% and so many other works of literature were written to ad#ance #arious
interpretations. The poetry of -ilton and ,lake is one e;ample of a lar"e body of
literature that tries to e;plicate issues raised by the ,ible. 2hen modern science
threatened the #alidity of reli"ions% a body of literature was written to reconcile the two.
$n -emoriam by Tennyson is one poem that deals with reli"ious faith in an increasin"ly
scientific world.
)or some people today% who do not consider themsel#es reli"ious% the naturalistic%
realistic and e;istential literatures help codify and define their beliefs. -any of these
people may not know it% but their sur#i#al is enhanced by the reli"ion of scientific
materialism which is itself a myth in the classic sense J 9$ts narrati#e form is the epic= the
e#olution of the uni#erse from the bi" ban" of fifteen billion years a"o throu"h the ori"in
of the elements and celestial bodies to the be"innin"s of life.:
4A
The idea that reli"ion de#eloped to enhance sur#i#al% and that reli"ious themes play
such a lar"e role in literature is further proof that literature functions for sur#i#al% but is
that function "ene pool sur#i#al or indi#idual sur#i#alL Reli"ions emphasi/e performin"
altruistic acts o#er selfish acts% and that supports a "ene pool sur#i#al theory. $ will
present more altruistic e;amples in literature a little later.
'nother function of literature is that of social criticism. This is often accomplished
with humorous and satiric methods. 2hen war fails to help a society% anti!war literature
de#elops. 'ristophanes& +ysistrata is an early e;ample of this type of literature% and
@atch!44 is a modern criticism of war. The sur#i#al ad#anta"e of anti!war literature is
more ob#ious than others.
The theme of a distrust of technolo"y and the process of industriali/ation can be seen
in some of the literature from the romantic period. The theme could ha#e helped "ene
pool sur#i#al because as industry "rew% so did the abuse of life in industrial cities.
Technolo"y can help or hinder "ene pool sur#i#al% and anti!technolo"y literature ser#es
to educate people about the useful limits of new de#elopments.
(ulli#er&s Tra#els and @at&s @radle are e;amples of literature that critici/e the abuse
of science. $t seems our society has learned somethin" from this type of literature because
we are now seriously Guestionin" the use of nuclear power% and we ha#e reduced research
on such potentially destructi#e thin"s as "enetic en"ineerin" and the neutron bomb.
Ioltaire&s @andide helped do away with the 9what is% is best: philosophy. $f people
feel they ha#e control o#er their en#ironment% then they are usually more likely to correct
situations which detract from "ene pool sur#i#al. $t mi"ht be ar"ued that the 9what is% is
best: philosophy de#eloped in literature% but in certain situations 3e.".% where people
actually had little control o#er their en#ironment or in a society where a set social order
was more efficient6 this philosophy mi"ht ha#e aided "ene pool sur#i#al because it
ustified conditions that could not be chan"ed% and thus encoura"ed people to keep doin"
their best under ad#ersity. The pre#ious e;ample also illustrates how literature may ha#e
a sur#i#al ad#anta"e in one society or period of time and not in others.
The Fun"le led to social le"islation which directly enhanced "roup sur#i#al. The
literature of Richard 2ri"ht% +an"ston Hu"hes and Fames ,aldwin probably did much to
correct the social inustices which hindered the 'frican 'merican "ene pool from
ad#ancin". 'rrowsmith and ,abbitt showed how narrow!minded "roups of people can
limit inno#ati#e thou"ht and disco#eries that mi"ht help "roups sur#i#e.
+o#e and se; are of top importance to "ene pool sur#i#al and that is why they are so
pre#alent as topics in literature. The representation of lo#e and se; in literature functions
hypertrophically to teach man the sociobiolo"ical way to lo#e. The seduction poems of
1onne% Shakespeare and -ar#ell are e;cellent illustrations of sociobiolo"ical theory.
This theory holds that since men can start thousands of pre"nancies and women can only
start about thirty% the women are the buyers in a market of many more sellers. This means
men should be more promiscuous and se;ually a""ressi#e because they ha#e many
chances at ad#ancin" their own "enes% and women should be more selecti#e with whom
they mate because they ha#e so few chances to ad#ance their "enes.
4B
$n seduction
poems% there is a man tryin" to con#ince a reluctant woman why she should ha#e se;
with him. '"ain% the reason this type of literature is necessary when it is already
"enetically determined that males and females should act this way is because facultati#e
"enes control this type of beha#ior. )acultati#e "enes make men and women more likely
to act in a certain manner that usually aids in "ene pool sur#i#al% but in some
en#ironments 3e.".% where there are many more women than men6 this pattern mi"ht
ser#e the "ene pool better if re#ersed. Seduction poems reinforce the feelin" in men that
they should be the a""ressi#e sellers and the feelin" in women that they should be
selecti#e buyers.
$n humans% specific "ene pools are ad#anced more effecti#ely when there are stron"
family relationships. 1onne&s poetry often deals with lo#e as somethin" more than
physical. He belie#ed that after death lo#ers will be united% and that their lo#e does not
die with death% only their bodies do. +iterature that deals with this type of theme
functions hypertrophically to insure that parents will stay to"ether between periods of
se;ual lo#e.
Iiolence is another theme often seen in literature that is tied directly to "ene pool
sur#i#al. The portrayal of #iolent situations ser#es to teach us how to deal with or a#oid
enemies% accidents% and any other dan"erous predicament we mi"ht "et into. Iiolence in
literature may also perform the cathartic function 'ristotle and ,urke belie#ed in.
The period of childhood is a time when literature plays an important education role.
@hildren show an intense interest in stories because they rely on learned knowled"e
rather than instinctual beha#ior to become producti#e members of their societies. The
stories they read and listen to are usually didactic about basic morals and proper ways to
act. The education function of literature is necessary for "ene pool sur#i#al% but there are
two more minor functions that are ust about as important. The ne;t one is to moti#ate.
The best effect of any book is that it ecites the reader to self acti!ity"
MThomas @arlyle
-erely bein" tau"ht about thin"s that need to be chan"ed will not brin" about the
desired chan"es. +iterature ser#es to stimulate and reinforce the moti#ational dri#es and
emotions within all of us.
Nne of the most #ital dri#es is the dri#e to li#e. -any forms of literature keep this
dri#e stron" by pro#idin" hope. Hope makes man achie#e and the lack of hope makes
him dull and listless.
47
' society that is moti#ated by hope is more likely to sur#i#e than
one that is not.
Reli"ious literature employs hope to moti#ate. The ,ible says there is life in hea#en
after death% and that pro#ides the inspiration to keep "oin" under ad#erse conditions.
-ytholo"ies can "i#e man the illusion of power o#er thin"s like weather% disease%
enemies and the future.
4E
This illustration supplies moti#ation to act e#en thou"h there is
the possibility of failure. 2hen man does fail% literature "i#es conciliation and often
e;plains why he failed. This "i#es him hope to try a"ain.
Heroic stories moti#ate people to action. Here&s what 2erner Fae"er had to say about
The $liad=
The $liad had a profound effect on the spectacular brilliance of (reek ci#ili/ation.
The 'chillean thirst for "lory helped promote a stri#in" for e;cellence in e#ery field%
which created the stunnin" "eniuses for the @lassical '"e. Essentially heroic le"ends are
the stuff for which ci#ili/ations li#e and die.
49
The @row $ndians ha#e a war lyric ur"in" warriors to die in battle for their tribe if
necessary.
<5
*ot only does this poem illustrate the moti#ation function of literature% but it
also supports sociobiolo"ical theory. $f the indi#idual were the sur#i#al unit% then
literature would not ha#e de#eloped ur"in" indi#iduals to die for their culture. 91ulce et
1ecorum Est Oro Oatria -ori: 3$t is sweet and fittin" to die for one&s country6 by Horace%
illustrates this same principle% but with the new methods of warfare in 22$ all "ene
pools seemed threatened and 2ilfred Nwen wrote 91ulce et 1ecorum Est: to encoura"e
people not to fi"ht.
' passa"e from 9+ocksley Hall: by Tennyson% dealin" with the 9federation of the
world: bein" 9lapped in uni#ersal law%: is said to ha#e inspired Oresident Truman to "i#e
the "o!ahead for the Pnited *ations. This type of world "o#ernment may e#entually
pre#ent nuclear destruction of all "ene pools.
's said earlier% lar"er societies ha#e a sur#i#al ad#anta"e o#er smaller ones and so
nationalistic literature has a sur#i#al ad#anta"e. 9Scots% 2ha Hae: by Robert ,urns is of
this type% and it ur"ed the Scottish to or"ani/e into such a "roup.
The third minor function of literature is to entertain. Earlier the education and
moti#ation functions were shown to be important in "ene pool sur#i#al% and the
entertainment function insures literature will be read% watched% or listened to so the other
functions are carried out. Osycholo"ical insi"hts aid social cohesion% and these insi"hts in
Shakespeare&s plays would ne#er ha#e been communicated to a lar"e audience if his
plays had not been entertainin". *o#els that tacitly teach us about our culture are read
because they are entertainin". The entertainin" Gualities of dramatic literature ser#e to aid
social cohesion which% in turn% aids in the effecti#eness of the society in dealin" with its
en#ironment.
<1
the entertainment Gualities also ser#e to di#ert the mind from current
problems which later need to be looked at in a fresh perspecti#e.
$n conclusion% the primary function of literature% accordin" to sociobiolo"ical theory%
is to aid in the sur#i#al of specific "ene pools. *ot only does literature moti#ate and
entertain% but it also teaches and operates hypertrophically to influence facultati#e "enes.
-any times literature ser#es as dialectic from which sur#i#al themes emer"e. The deep
structures of literature are inherited "enetically and allow people to create #aried
literatures to meet the specific sur#i#al needs their en#ironment imposes upon them. This
"ene pool sur#i#al function is compatible with many current theories on the function of
literature% but these other theories are subordinate to the "enetic function.
This theory may seem dehumani/in"% but it will allow us to more fully understand the
important role literature and literary criticism play in our society% and that should pro#e to
be humani/in".
QQQ
Endnotes
1 Robert Taylor% $ntroduction to @ultural 'nthropolo"y 3,oston= 'llyn and ,acon%
$nc.6% 197<% p. ?B<.
4 *orthrop )rye% The Educated $ma"ination 3,loomin"ton= $ndiana Pni#ersity Oress6%
19B?% p. B<.
< -atthrew 'rnold% 9Oreface to Ooems%: in The *orton 'ntholo"y of En"lish
+iterature% <rd ed.% ed. -.H. 'brams et al. 3*ew Rork= 2.2. *orton S @ompany% $nc.6%
197?% p. 1<71.
? Fames +. Oeacok% @onsciousness and @han"e 3*ew Rork= Fohn 2iley and Sons6%
197A% p. ?4
A (. S. Cirk% -yth% $ts -eanin" and )unctions 3,erkeley= Pni#ersity of @alifornia
Oress6% 1975% p. 7.
B Thomas '. Sebeok% -yth= ' Symposium 3+ondon= $ndiana Pni#ersity Oress6% 19BA%
p.A?
7 2illiam H. Rueckert% Cenneth ,urke 3-inneapolis= Pni#ersity of -innesota
Oress6% 19B<% p. A?
E $bid.% p.<E
9 )rye% p. A7
15 $bid. p.151
11 $an (. ,arbour% -yths% -odels and Oaradi"ms 3*ew Rork= Harper S Row6% 197?%
p.4?
14 1a#id -ar"olies% The )unction of +iterature 3*ew Rork= $nternational
Oublishers6% 19B9% p.145
1< Saul ,ellow% 9*obel +ecture%: 'merican Scholar% Summer 1977% p. 44A
1? 9Nur Selfish (enes%: *ewsweek% Nct. 1B% 197E% p. 11E
1A $bid.% pp. 141!144
1B +eslie '. 2hite% The E#olution of @ulture 3*ew Rork= -c(raw!Hill ,ook
company% $nc.6% 19A9% p. E
17 1a#id O. ,arash% Sociobiolo"y and ,eha#ior 3*ew Rork= Else#ier6% 1977% p. <19
1E +edyard Stebbins% Orocesses of Nr"anic E#olution 3En"lewood @liffs= Orentice!
Hall $nc.6% 1974% p. 17E.
19 2hite pp. E!9
45 ,arash% p. 11B
41 +edyard Stebbins% The ,asis of Oro"ressi#e E#olution 3Pni#ersity of *orth
@arolina Oress6% 19B9% p. 1?4
44 92hy Rou 1o 2hat Rou 1o%: Time% 'u"ust 4% 1977% p. AB.
4< 9Nur Selfish (enes%: pp. 141!14<.
4? 92hy Rou 1o 2hat Rou 1o%: p. AE
4A Edward N. 2ilson% Nn Human *ature 3+ondon= Har#ard Pni#ersity Oress6% 197E%
p. 194
4B 92hy Rou 1o 2hat Rou 1o%: p.B<
47 E/ra Statland% The Osycholo"y of Hope 3San )rancisco= Fossey!,ass $nc.6% 19B9%
p. 1
4E 2hite% p.19
49 Fames 2ei"el% -ytholo"y 3+incoln= @.C. Hille"ass6% 197<% p. 1A
<5 Ohilip C. ,ock% -odern @ultural 'nthropolo"y 3*ew Rork= 'lfred '. Cnopf6%
197?% p. <17
<1 Theodosius 1ob/hansky% -ankind E#ol#in" 3+ondon= Rale Pni#ersity Oress6%
19B4% p. 417
Bibliograhy
'ristotle. 'ristotle&s Ooetics. Trans. +eon (olden. En"lewood @liffs% *.F.=
Orentice!Hall% $nc. 19BE
'rnold% -atthew. 9Oreface to Ooems%: in The *orton 'ntholo"y of En"lish
+iterature% <rd ed.
Ed. -.H. 'brams et al. *ew Rork= 2.2. *orton S @ompany $nc.% 197?
,arash% 1a#id O. Sociobiolo"y and ,eha#ior. *ew Rork= Else#ier% 1977
,arbour% $an (. -yths% -odels and Oaradi"ms. *ew Rork= Harper S Row% 197?
,ellow% Saul. 9*obel +ecture.: 'merican Scholar% Summer 1977
,ock% Ohilip C. -odern @ultural 'nthropolo"y. *ew Rork= 'lfred '. Cnopf% 197?
@ampbell% Foseph. The Hero with a Thousand )aces. *ew Rork= Oantheon ,ooks $nc.
19?9
1ob/hansky% Theodosius. -ankind E#ol#in". +ondon= Rale Pni#ersity Oress% 19B4
)rye% *orthrop. The Educated $ma"ination. ,loomin"ton= $ndiana Pni#ersity Oress%
19B?
)rye% *orthrop. 9Relationships of +iterary Study%: in +iterature and -yth. Ed. Fames
Thorne.
*ew Rork= -odern +an"ua"e 'ssociation of 'merica% 19B7
Caser% 2. 9Reality of )iction= ' )unctionalist 'pproach top +iterature.: *ew +it.
Hist.
'utumn 197A.
Cirk% (.S. -yth% $ts -eanin" and )unctions. ,erkeley= Pni#ersity of @alifornia
Oress% 1975.
+otman% F. and '.-. Oiati"orsky. 9Te;t and )unction.: *ew +iterary History 9=4<<!
??%
2inter 197E.
-alinowski% ,ronislaw. -yth in Orimiti#e Osycholo"y. +ondon= Ce"an Oaul% Trench%
Trubner S @o.% 194B.
-ar"olies% 1a#id. The )unction of +iterature. *ew Rork= $nternational Oublishers%
19B9
Oeacok% Fames +. @onsciousness and @han"e. *ew Rork= Fohn 2iley and Sons% 197A
Rueckert% 2illiam H. Cenneth ,urke. -inneapolis= Pni#ersity of -innesota Oress%
19B<
Sebeok% Thomas '. -yth= ' Symposium. +ondon= $ndiana Pni#ersity Oress% 19BA
Sol/henitsyn% 'le;ander. *obel +ecture. *ew Rork= )arrar% Straus and (irou;% 1974
Statland% E/ra. The Osycholo"y of Hope. San )rancisco= Fossey!,ass $nc.% 19B9
Stebbins% +edyard. Orocesses of Nr"anic E#olution. En"lewood @liffs= Orentice!Hall
$nc.% 1974.
Stebbins% +edyard. The ,asis of Oro"ressi#e E#olution. Pni#ersity of *orth @arolina
Oress% 19B9.
Taylor% Robert. $ntroduction to @ultural 'nthropolo"y. ,oston= 'llyn and ,acon%
$nc.% 197<.
2ei"el% Fames. -ytholo"y. +incoln= @.C. Hille"ass% 197<.
2hite% +eslie '. The E#olution of @ulture. *ew Rork= -c(raw!Hill ,ook @ompany%
$nc.% 19A9.
2ilson% Edward N. Nn Human *ature. +ondon= Har#ard Pni#ersity Oress% 197E.
9Nur Selfish (enes%: *ewsweek% Nctober 1B% 197E% pp. 1EE!14<.
92hy Rou do 2hat Rou 1o%: Time% 'u"ust 1% 1577% 99. AB!B<
T T T